Hello
fellow feminist. I am currently
conducting a debate on "ERA"
and I really need some information
to back up my debate. This is
a school debate and two of my
fellow female classmates and
myself are up against two egotistical
males. They are going to bring
up the point of females not
being capable of doing as well
as men in the military and work
force. I am in the N.J.R.O.T.C
program at school and I plan
on enrolling in to the navy
so this really upsets me greatly.
If you can help me in any way
please e-mail me. Thank you
for giving time to reading this.
Sincerely, R.(blondie)

Thanks
for your note. To begin your
argument, I think that you have
to downplay what the ERA would
mean--and that is that it would
merely be a basis for equal
rights under law. That is that
women and men would be equal
under the law and, therefore,
equal to the same laws and same
privileges. It's important to
play up how it is only the beginning.

As for women being able to do
what men can do--the easy way
to prove this is to point out
for every rule there is an exception.
For instance--there is a woman
(Bev Francis) who at one time
bench pressed more than Arnold
Schwarzenager. For years people
said that there would never
be a women's professional basketball
team or soccer team--and now
that is changing. So once the
possibilities open up, women
are capable of doing what men
can do. It's just that people
are closed to the possibilities--they
don't want to even imagine it.
But once they have, the possibilities
are endless.

You should also start by pointing
out ways that you see men and
women achieving the same things
in your own school--leading
in the sciences, math, arts,
sports, school government--that
goes for students as well as
faculty. I hope that helps.
Good luck -- and good luck in
the Navy, too.